a model for the nation state by state. i have said that at that time. the federal government taking over health care for the entire nation and it was king aside the 10th amendment that gives states the rights for these kind of things is not the course for america to have a stronger, more vibrant economy. hetomthe role of government worked first on this. there is aieve that yo fundamental difference between how you view the mission of the federal government? >> i definitely think there are differences the first role is to keep the american safe.

that's a step that i have worked on every single day. number two people can succeed. the genius of america is the free enterprise and freedom and the fact that people can go out there and start a business, work on an idea, make their own decisions. as abraham lincoln understood, there are also some things we do better together. in the middle of the civil war, abraham lincoln said, let's help to finance the transcontinental railroad.

let's start the national academy of sciences. let's start land grant colleges. we want to give these gateways of opportunities to all americans. if all americans are getting an opportunity, we will all be better off. that does not restrict freedom, that enhances it. what i have tried to do as president is to apply the same principles. when it comes to education, what i have said is we have to reform schools that are not working. we do something called race to the top. we have said states -- we will give you more money if you initiate reforms. we have had 46 states who have made a real difference. what i have also said is, let's hire another 100,000 math and science teachers to make sure we maintain a technological lead and people are skilled and able to succeed. hard-pressed states right now cannot do that. we have seen layoffs of hundreds of thousands of teachers over the last several

years. gov. romney does not think we need more teachers, i do. i think that is the kind of investment or the federal government can help. it can make a difference. as a consequence we will have a better trained work force, and that will create jobs because companies want to locate in places where there is a skilled workforce. >> i love great schools. massachusetts, our schools are ranked no. one of 50 states. the key to grade schools, is great teachers. i reject the idea i do not believe in great teachers. every state should make that decision on their own. the role of government -- look behind us. the constitution and the declaration of independence. is to promote and protect the principles of those documents first. life and liberty -- we have a responsibility to protect the lives of people. i do not believe in cutting the military. i want to maintain the strength of the military. the line that says we are

endowed by our creator with our rights -- we must maintain our commitment to religious tolerance and freedom in this country. it also says we are endowed by our creator with the right to pursue happiness as we choose. i interpret that as making sure those people who are less fortunate and cannot care for a themselves are cared for by one another. we are a nation that believes we are all children of the same god and we care for those who have difficulties. those who are elderly, those who are disabled, we care for them. we look for discovery and innovation and all these things to pursue the pursuit of happiness for our citizens. we believe in maintaining for individuals the right to pursue their dreams. not to have the government substitute itself for the rights of free individuals. what we are seeing right now is in my view a trickle-down government approach which has

government thinking they can do a better job every people pursuing their dreams. is not working. the proof of that is not everyone is and work here we have gone to 47 million people in food stamps. 50% of college graduates this year cannot find work. we know the path regarding is not working. it is temper a new path. >> education. does the federal government have a responsibility for education? >> the primary responsibility is at the state and local level. i agree with arne duncan. some ideas he has put forward on race to the top. some of them i agree with and congratulate him on pursuing that. the federal government can get state and local schools. i wanted the kids who are getting federal dollars from title 1 -- disabled kids or lower income kids, i went and to be able to go to the kids at -- to the school of their

choice. i would have them follow the child and let the parent and child decide where to send their student. >> how do you see the federal government's responsibility to improve the quality of education? >> it has a significant role to play. we have worked with republican and democratic governors to initiate major reforms. they are having an impact right now. this is where budgets matter. budgets reflect choices. when gov. romney indicates that he wants to cut taxes and potentially benefit people like me and him, to pay for it we

have to initiate significant cuts in federal support for education, that makes a difference. his running mate congressman ryan put forward a budget that reflects many of the principles gov. romney has talked about. it was not very detailed. this seems to be a trend. what it did do -- if you extrapolate it how much money we are talking about, you are looking at cutting education by 20%. when it comes to community colleges, we are seeing great work done out there all over the country because we have the opportunity to train people for jobs that exist right now. one thing i suspect we probably agree on is getting businesses to work with community colleges. >> do you agree? >> let me finish my point. they are partnering -- they are designing training programs and people who are going through

them know there is a job waiting for them if they complete it. there requires some federal support. let me say one final example. when it comes to making college affordable, whether it is two- year or four-year, one thing i did is we were spending $60 million to banks and lenders as middlemen for the student loan program, even though they were guaranteed. there was no risk for the banks and lenders, but they were taking billions out of the system. why not cut out the middleman? we have been able to provide millions of more students assistance, lower or keep a low interest rates on student loans, this is an example of where our

priorities make a difference. i genuinely believe gov. romney cares about education. when he tells a student that you should borrow money from your parents to go to college, that indicates the degree to which there may not be as much of a focus on the fact that folks like myself, folks like michele, kids who probably attended the university of denver did not have that option. for us to make sure they have the opportunity and can walk through the door, that is vitally important not just to the kids, it is how we will grow the economy over the long term. >> we are running out of time. response to that. >>-- respnd to that. >> i have no plan to cut education funding and grants for people going to college. i am not planning on making changes there. you make a good point.

the place you put your money makes it a clear indication on where your heart is. you put $90 million into green jobs. i am all in favor of green energy. that would have hired 2 million teachers. $90 billion. these businesses may have gone out of business -- a number of them happen to be owned by people who are contributors to your campaigns. the right course for a merit oppose the government -- america's government is not to pick winners and losers, not taking over the health care system that has existed in this country for a long time and has produced the best health records in the world, the right answer is to say how do we make the private sector more efficient? how do we make schools more competitive? i suggest we grade our schools so parents can take their kid to a school that is more successful.

i did not want to cut our commitment to education, i want to make it more efficient. i have had that experience. i do not just talking about it, i have been there. massachusetts schools are ranked no. 1 in the nation. this is because i care about education for all of our kids. >> we barely have in three minutes left. i will not raid the two of you and say your answers have been too long. >> you have done a great job. >> the role of government and governing, we only have three minutes left before we go to the closing statements. i want to ask finally -- remember we have three minutes total time. many of the legislative functions of the federal

government are in a state of paralysis as a result of partisan gridlock. if elected -- if reelected in your case, what will you do about that? >> i had a great experience of being elected in a state where my legislator -- legislature was 87% democrat. that means we had to work together to get things done. we cut taxes -- >> what will you do as president? >> i will sit down on day one -- actually the day i get elected -- i will continue as we did in my state. we met every monday and talked about the challenges in our state in that case. we have to work on a collaborative basis, not because we will compromise our principles, but because there is common ground. the reason i am in this race is because there are people

hurting. we face this deficit that could crush future generations. there are developments a round the world that are of real concern. republicans and democrats both loved america, but we need to have leadership in washington that will bring people together and get the job done and could not care less if it is a republican or democrat. i have done it before, and i will do it again. >> i think gov. romney will have a busy first day because he is going to repeal obamacare which will not be popular among democrats if you are sitting down with them. my philosophy has been, i will take ideas from anybody as long as they are advancing the cause of making middle-class families stronger and giving ladders of opportunity. that is how we cut off -- that is how we cut taxes for the middle-class. that is how we cut spending that was not advancing the cause. that is how we signed a free- trade agreements into law.

that is how we repealed don't ask don't tell.l that is how we ended the war in iraq, and that is how we will wind down the war in afghanistan. we have seen progress even under republican control of the house of representatives. part of being principled and part of being a leader is being able to describe exactly what it is you intend to do, not just saying "i'll sit down." occasionally you have to say no to people both in your own party and in the other party. yes, have we had some fights between me and the republicans when they fought against us reining in the excess against wall street? absolutely. that was a fight that needed to be had. about whether americans had more

security with their health insurance, that was a fight we needed to have. part of leadership and governing is both saying what it is you are for and also being able to say no to some things. when it comes to his own party in the course of this campaign, he has not displayed the willingness to say no to some of the more extreme parts of his party. >> that brings us to closing statements. gov. romney, you elected to go last. you have two minutes, mr. president. >> i want to thank you, and i want to thank gov. romney because this was a terrific debate. i want to thank the university of denver. four years ago we were going through a major crisis.

yet, my faith in the american future is undiminished. the reason is because of its people. because of a woman i met in north carolina who decided at 55 to go back to school because she wanted to inspire her daughter and now she has a new job. because of a company in minnesota willing to give up salaries and perks for the executives to make sure they did not lay off workers during a recession. the auto workers that you need in toledo or detroit take such pride in building the best cars in the world not just because of a paycheck, but because it gives them a sense of pride that they are helping to build america. the question now is how do we build on the strengths? everything i have tried to do everything i am proposing for the next four years as far as improving education or developing american energy or making sure we are closing loopholes for companies shipping jobs overseas and focusing on small businesses create jobs in

the united states, or closing deficit in a responsible way for a lot of us to invest in the future, all of those things are designed to make sure that the american people, their genius, their determination is channeled and they have an opportunity to succeed. everybody is getting a fair shot. everybody is playing by the same rules. four years ago i said i am not a perfect man and i will not be a perfect president. that is probably a promise gov. romney things i kept. i promised i would fight every single day on behalf of the american people. i have kept that promise. if you vote for me, i promise i will fight just as hard in the second term. >> thank you.

thank you, mr. president. thank you for tuning in. this is an important election, and i am concerned about america. i am concerned about the direction of america has been taking. i know this is bigger than any election about the two of us as individuals. is bigger than our respective parties. it is about what kind of america do you want to have for yourself and your children. there are two different paths we are speaking about this evening and over the course of the next month we will have two other debates. we will talk about the two paths. they lead in different directions. it is not just looking at our words, you can look at the record. there is no question if the president were to be reelected, he would continue to see a middle-class squeeze it. we have had 43 straight months with unemployment over 8%. i will help create 12 million new jobs in this country with rising incomes.

if the president is reelected, obamacare will be fully installed. in my view that will make a whole different way of life for people who counted on the insurance plan the had in the past. he was the health premiums go up by $2,500 per family. -- you will see health premiums go up by $2,500 per family. we want each state to craft their own programs and we will focus on getting the cost of health care down. if the president is reelected, you will see a $716 billion cut to medicare. you will have hospitals and providers no longer accepting medicare patience. i will restore the $716 billion to medicare. the president is reelected, you will see dramatic cuts to the military. i will not cut our commitment to our military.

i will keep america strong, and did the middle class working again. thank you. >> thank you governor and mr. president. the next debate will be the vice-presidential even to in ky. for now from the university of denver, thank you and good night. [cheers and applause] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2012] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [applause] [cheers and applause]

>> before tomorrow evening's debate, we have posted a question on their face but page for you. have the presidential debates made a different? and visits c-span.org/c-span and

share your \ thought. we are live in florida today at the university and had that market at presidential debates. walking through the media final center.

>> and our cameras like then florida it today as preparations are underway for tomorrow night's presidential debate. there is a look at the stage on which the president and governor romney both have the third and final seven debates tomorrow. >> with a focus on the presidential debates, c-span is asking middle and high school students to send a message to the president as part of the documentary program.

but there is $50,000 in total prizes. this is open to students grade 6 through 12. for complete details, go online studentcam.org. >> remarks came in today for mcgovern. he died this morning. service willcy of live on at the leadership program crated in his name and in the hearts of all those who took courage and inspiration on his public life. harry reid also mentioned the former senator's passing st. "he

dedicated his life to fighting the skirt property. he will be sorely missed." george mcgovern and died this morning. he was 90. president obama and mitt romney gave a keynote address last week at the 67th alfred smith memorial foundation dinner in new york city. it is a fund-raiser for each candidate to joke about themselves and the 2012 campaign this is president obama plus the second time attending. he appeared with senator john mccain of could 2008. this has been a fixture at the campaign dating back to the 1960's. this is about 40 minutes. veblen'

>> i would like to say that dr. kissinger. . he told me it is his favorite dinner. we have many distinguished guests tonight. the governor is working and some material for his 2006 dinner speech. he gets closer and closer to the putnam every year. chuck schumer is here.

there's recently a story about a him actively playing matchmaker among the staff. 12 marriages resulted. it is safe to say that he has stopped trying to work across the aisle. he's pushing them down the aisle. congratulations. congratulations for getting coverage from the only section in the new are times that does not already covered you comment the wedding section. -- cover you, at the wedding section. foas you know, the motto is lean

forward. if you lean forward what he is talking, [inaudible] of course i want to raise my glass to your honor mayor bloomberg. [applause] >> a lot of people criticized the mayor's decision to ban drinks. this is an issue of deep personal significance. a couple of years ago, the mayor almost drowned in a big gulp. [laughter] how is it going over there? last but not least, we have governor romney and president obama. [applause]

you both look so dashing, as you call it, governor, business casual. [laughter] my great-grandfather got into politics for very simple reasons. he liked people. rich, poor, democrat, republican. al smith was a friend to all. [applause]

throughout his public life, he was a champion of the worker, an advocate for the needy. and a plain-spoken voice. as you all know, my great- grandfather was the first catholic nominee for president. and mitt romney, the first mormon nominated for president. [applause] by great-grandfather and mitt romney have other things in common. for example, they both campaign for governor. as democrats. [laughter] their biggest adversaries were successful businessman. for my great-grandfather, it was herbert hoover. for mitt romney, it was mitt romney. [laughter]

it is no secret that governor romney is a very wealthy man. he is also a very generous man. every year, he gives at least 10% of his income to charity. [applause] not so fast. [laughter] the charity is the federal government. [laughter] seriously, i have seen governor romney's de generosity to his church. i must confess. we invited him here to convert.

[laughter] [applause] really, governor, your father was from mexico and you have five kids. are you sure you are not catholic? [applause] mr. president, you are not getting a free pass tonight. we arcs -- we are excited to have you here tonight. almost as excited as we were in 2008. although the catholic church does so president obama a. debt of gratitude. easieraught us if it's for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle than it is for a rich man to enter the kingdom of debt -- of heaven.

say what you will about the economy. mr. president, it will be a lot easier for a lot more people to get into heaven. [applause] we recognize you have some challenges this year. it is never could when your opponent has produced more sums than you have jobs. i am pretty sure that number is accurate. paul ryan gave it to me. he is such an effective attack dog, i am worried governor romney might strap him on the roof of a car. of course, president obama

wishes he could put joe biden on a car, too. the amtrak quiet car. [laughter] all kidding aside, one way both got us a ride are makig t -- both are making this a historic election is to have a roman catholic on both sides of the ballot. that is worth applauding. [applause] ladies and gentlemen, we get to hear from a man. i am pleased to present the 2012 republican nominee for president, governor mitt romney. [applause]

>> thank you. thank you so much. your eminence, cardinal, mr. president, governor, mayor bloomberg, senator, al and ann smith, thank you for your invitation and your warm welcome. i appreciate your friendship very much. thank you. [applause] al, you are right. a campaign can require a lot of wardrobe changes.

cuisines in the morning, suits for a lunch fund raiser, a sport coat for dinner. it is nice to finally relax and wear what we wear around the house. [applause] i am glad to join in this tradition. i am pleased the president is here. we were chatting this evening. it was like tuesday night never happened. i was hoping the president would bring joe biden along this evening because he will laugh at anything. [applause]

this is not a night for serious politics. it's nice to see president obama and the cardinal despite their differences. i am sure the cardinal has no hard feelings and we will get an indication of that to see if the president's wine will turn into water. or if my water turns into wine. i am pleased to see the governor, already being talked about to be high office. he may be getting ahead of himself. the man has put in one term as a governor, he has a father who was a governor, and he thinks that was enough to run for president. [laughter] [applause]

we are down to the final months of the president's term. [laughter] [applause] as president obama surveys the waldorf banquet room with everybody in white ties, you have to wonder what he is thinking. so little time, so much to redistribute. [applause] do not be surprised if the president mentions the monthly jobs support where there was a slight improvement in the numbers. he knows how to seize the moment. the already has a compelling new campaign slogan. you are better off now than you were four weeks ago. [applause] with or without all the dignitaries that are here, the al smith had dinner lives up to its billing.

usually when i get invited to dinners like this, i am the designated driver. [applause] your kind hospitality tonight gives me a chance to convey my deep and long held respect for the catholic church. i have special admiration for the apostle saint peter, to whom it was set up on this rock i will build my church. the story is all the more inspiring when you consider he has so many skeptics at the time who would say, if you have a church, you did not build that. [applause] only 19 days ago until the finish line. the campaign is full of surprises and the debates are exciting. we had a very fun debate the other night.

candy crowley was there. people are curious how we prepare for the debates. here is what i do. first, refrained from out -- refrain from alcohol. then find a straw man, and merciless attack. big bird did not see it coming. in the spirit of sesame street, the president's remarks tonight are brought to you by a letter "o" and the number $16 trillion. [applause] the campaign will be grueling, exhausting, and president obama are each lucky to have one person always in our corners, someone we can lean on, someone who is a comforting presence. i have my beautiful wife, he has bill clinton.

[applause] we got a big dose of weeks biden charm. i heard from the federal election commission. from now on, whenever he appears on tv, there is a recording of me afterwards that says, "i am mitt romney, and i approve this message." [laughter] rules of fairness. i never suggest the press is biased. they have their job to do and i have mine to do. my job is to lay out a positive

vision for the future of the country and their job is to make sure nobody finds out about it. [applause] let's just say some in the media have a certain way of looking at things. when i suddenly pulled ahead in the major polls, the headlines were, obama is leading from behind. [laughter] i have already seen early reports from tonight's dinner. headline, obama and priced by catholics. romney dodges rich people. [laughter] [applause] the president has put his own stamp on relations with the church. there have been awkward moments. like when the president pulled

pope benedict aside. he said, whatever the problem is, just blame it on john paul ii. [applause] the president has found a way to take a sting out of the mandates for the church. they will be in latin. we have fundamental unsound principles that guide us. he and i feel the pressures and tensions of a close contest. it would be easy to let a healthy competition give way to the personal and petty. fortunately, we do not carry the burden of disliking each other. the president has some very fine and gracious moments. our 44th president has many gifts and a beautiful family

that would make any man proud. [applause] in our country, you can oppose someone in politics and make a competent case against their politics without any ill will. that is how it is for me. there is more to life and politics. you show this in the work you do. the work goes on day in and day out in this organization. you answer with calmed, and willing hearts. in service for poor and care for the sick. to help an innocent child who is going to be born. [applause] i do not presume to have all of your support.

on a night like this, i will not ask for it. you can be certain that in the great causes of compassion that you come together to embrace, that i stand proudly with you as an ally and friend. god bless you all and god bless the united states of america. thank you. [applause]

>> thank you very much. ladies and gentlemen, there is only one way to introduce our next speaker. the president of united states of america, barack obama. [applause] >> thank you. thank you. thank you so much. thank you. everyone please take a seat or clint eastwood would yell at them. [laughter] thank you to al, your eminence, governor, senator, mayor bloomberg, all the distinguished guests here.

in less than three weeks, voters will decide this incredibly important election. it begs the question, what are we doing here? [laughter] new yorkers also have a big choice to make. you have to decide which one of us you want holding up traffic for the next four years. [laughter] tonight, i am here with a man whose father was a popular governor who could very well be president someday. i am hoping it is andrew cuomo. [applause] this is the third time governor

romney and i have met recently. as some of you have noticed, i have a lot more energy in our second ave. i felt well rested after a nice long that i had during the first debate. -- long nap i had during the first debate. [laughter] [applause] it turns out millions of americans focused on the second debate, who did not focus on the first debate. i happen to be one of them. i want to apologize to chris matthews. four years ago, i gave him a hit to the leg. this time, i gave him a stroke. there are a lot of things i learned from that experience.

for example, i learned that there are worse off -- worse things that can happen to you on your anniversary than forgetting to buy a gift. when or lose, this is my last political campaign. i am trying to drink it all in. unfortunately, mayor bloomberg will only let me have 16 ounces. [laughter] that is okay. i am still having -- making the most of my time. i went shopping in the stores in midtown. i understand governor romney went shopping for some stores in midtown. [laughter] [applause] it brought back great memories. some of you know i went to school here in new york. i had a wonderful experience here. [applause]

i used to love wafting through central park -- walking through central park, going to yankee stadium. you really did not build that. i hope everybody is aware of that. [applause] it has been four years since i was last at the al smith dinner. things have changed. i have heard people say i am not as young as i used to be. where is that golden smile? where is that pep in your step? i say, settle down, joe, i am trying to run a campaign. [applause] he does smile when he says it. tomorrow, it is back to campaigning.

the cities across our great country. i hear the same thing everywhere i go. we were hoping to see michelle. i have to admit it can be a grind. sometimes it feels like this race has drag on forever. paul ryan assured me we have only been running for two hours and 50 something minutes. [applause] the economy is on everybody's minds. i do not have a joke here. i thought it would be useful to remind everybody. we are getting to that time where folks are making up their minds. the other day, i was endorsed. that is a big relief. [laughter] tonight is not about the

disagreements governor romney and i may have. it is what we have in common, beginning with our unusual names. mitt is his middle name. i wish i could use my middle name. [applause] even though we are enjoying ourselves tonight, we are thinking ahead to our final debate on monday. i am hoping governor romney and i will have a chance to answer the question on the minds of millions of americans watching at home. is this happening again? monday's debate will be different. the topic is foreign policy. spoiler alert -- we got bin laden. [applause]

world affairs are a challenge for every candidate. some of you guys remember after my foreign trip in 2008, i was attacked class as a celebrity because i was so popular with our allies. i am impressed with how well governor romney has avoided that problem. [applause] just so everyone knows, in our third debate, we will not spend a whole lot of time interrupting each other. we will also interrupt the moderator just to mix things up. finally, let me say i have been doing some thinking. i have decided for our final debate, i have to go back to the strategy i used to compare -- prepare for the first debate. i am kidding. i want to make you sweat. [laughter]

in all seriousness, i could not be more honored to be here this evening. i am honored to be with leaders in both the private and public sectors, particularly the extraordinary work done by the catholic church. [applause] it is written in scripture that tribulation produces perseverance, and perseverance character, and character, hope. this country has fought through very tough years together. we have come as far as we have mainly because the perseverance and character of ordinary americans. it says something about who we are as people that at the middle of an election season, opposing candidates can share the same stage.

people from all parties come together to support a worthy cause high. i want to thank governor romney for joining me because i admire him very much as a family man and a loving father and those are two titles that will always matter more than any political ones. [applause] we may have different political perspectives. i am certain we share the hope that the next four will have the same decency and the same willingness to come together for a higher purpose that are on display this evening. may we all in the words of al smith do our full duty as citizens.

god bless you, your family, and the united states of america. thank you very much. [applause] >> we come to the main event. [laughter] we turn to our host for closery remarks and benediction. ladies and gentlemen, the arch bishop of new york. [applause]

>> it does traditionally fall to the host of this evening to call it tonight. thank you everybody for your gracious company this beautiful evening. what a unique honor to welcome and thank president obama and governor and mrs. romney. [applause] our two candidates claim both of your parties, the republicans and democrats, are big, containing extraordinary perverse, even contrary an opposite groups. you two do not have anything over the catholic church. we have both biden and ryan. [laughter] governor romney, thank you i was

hoping the republican canada might be governor christie. i would have looked a lot better sitting next to him. mr. president, i trust you will be able to report to mrs. obama that i ate my vegetables and salads. if she had been first lady when i was growing up in the '50s, i would not be in the shape i am in. as many of you may know, i just returned from rome a couple hours ago, where i am burt dissipating in the senate of distance. thanks to the jet, i will be able to return to rome after the conclusion of this evening's meal. [applause] by the way, just before i left this morning, " bennett to it -- pope benedict the 16 pulled me aside and asked me to deliver a message to both candidates. mr. president, governor romney,

do you know what the holy father asked me to tell the two of you? neither do i.. he said it in latin. [laughter] when you think about it, only this dinner could bring together two men of the same colin who disagree on almost everything, both of whom think they are the world's experts on everything, who do not usually even like being in the same room together. . .

>> some folks barely get by, guest from westchester, grateful for all of us to be people of faith and loyal americans. loving country. convinced that faith is not

who is happy i hope they are to be here with us this evening would much rather to be at home with michelle and their families. that speaks volumes. all of us, recalling a man of deep catholic faith and ringing patriotism who had tear in his irish eyes in what we would all the uns of the world. the unemployed, the uninsured, the unwanted, the unwed mother,

the innocent fragile unborn baby in her womb, the undocumented, the unhouse, the unhealthy, the unfed, the undereducated, government, al smith should be on the side of these uns. but a government he also believe partnering with family, church, parish, neighborhood, organizations and community never intruding or opposing since all said and done, it's in god we trust. not ultimately in god and politics. al smith, the happy warrior, the warrior on behalf of the uns, who is so close to jesus. or to the angel of the leopards

of hawaii, sister maryann cope both women of new york who declared saints. so tenderly close blessed mother theresa who reminded us of all the five finger gospel. as often you do to one of these, the least of my breathen, you do it to me. god bless -- here's my closing benediction, simple to heart felt this evening -- god bless the memory of al smith. god bless those uns, the god bless the al smith foundation and this archdiocese of new york which continues. god bless all of you.

god bless our two candidates, god bless america, and thank god for this great evening. good night and god bless. thank you. [applause] >> ladies and gentlemen, let's have a warm rounded ovation for our speaker our cardinal. [applause]

>> ahead of tomorrow's night's presidential debate in boca raton, florida our c-span cameras are live today for a look around.

and there a look at the hall where the candidates will debate tomorrow night. tomorrow on first look at the hall here, you'll see the desk and where the seats are and inside that hall, tomorrow night's foreign policy debate live at 9:00 here on c-span. now tomorrow on "washington journal," we'll preview the evening's final presidential

debate with jonathan tepperman. then we'll hold a round table discussion on competitive and u.s. out and senate races. our guest jennifer duffy and david wassermann. "washington journal" live at 7:00 eastern on c-span. george mcgovern former north dakota representative and senator and 1972 presidential candidate died in morning. today, at 6:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span, we'll be showing you part of his oral history interview on what it was like to run for president in 1968 and again in 1972 against president nixon. >> i gone to visit it. it's been there since 1947 which was the founded year of the

country. it showed films from the united states to long land and bollywood and india. to me it symbolized the resilience of the country in spite of all the violence and trouble people suffered over the last many decades in pakistan and during one of the protests against video that insulted the prophet mohammed. had a negative image of the prophet mohammed. i don't see that as a protest against the west. i don't really see that as a protest against the united states, even though avatar, one of the movies you could have gone to see at these theaters. you had islamist activist who have not liked these movie theaters for decades. way before this prophet mohammed

film which was never shown any way. they grabbed an opportunity to attack and they whipped up a bunch of young people. there were teenagers involved who stole sodas from the snack bar on their way to burn this movie theater. i argue in that piece what they really attacking was the nature of their own country perhaps they did not understand. i try to say that with the greatest respect. who am i as a foreigner to say what your country is about. i know having studied the history, having listening to pakistani themselves, it's an incredibly diverse place. lots of different cultures. lots of different traditions. lots of different ways to be -- that movie theater symbolized pakistan and that is what people burned when they set on fire. >> more tonight at 8:00 on

c-span's "q&a." now discussion on the ideological make-up of the tea party movement and where members of the movement stand on economic and social issues. this is hosted by the cato institute. it's about an hour in a half. >> good afternoon. welcome to today's event for i will -- libertarian roots of

the tea party. i leak to ask everyone to silence your cell phones or any kind of electronic guys that make noise. so we don't have something happen down the line a surprise. welcome also to all who are viewing this event on c-span or via streaming video. for those not here with us, i like to point out that you can join the discussion and send a question for the q&a portion using the twitter hash tag tp roots. that hash tag and info about this and other cato events can be found at our event's web page. if you happen to be watching one of our events for the first

time, the cato institute is nonprofit. that means unlike both major political parties, we support both economic freedom and social freedom. the question we're going to address today is to what extent the tea party movement shares those libertarian values. we have with us today the authors of new cato study of tea party opinion. actually a break through and bring information to the table that has been missing and that is our study, the libertarian roots of the tea party. you can find free copies here at the event or if you're at home, you can go to our website, cato.org and do you know load a copy for free. today we're going to turn first to david kirby. david kirby is vice president of development and manages freedom works, growing fundraising operations. he's also a policy analyst here

at the cato institute. before joining freedom works, david served campaign director at george mason university where he led a multimillion dollar campaign. david is also executive director of america's future foundation and young conservative and libertarian leaders. david's publications including many on our topic today. the libertarian vote, the libertarian vote in the age of obama both which you can find at cato.org and now the libertarian roots of the tea party. many of our people today has appeared in all the leading magazine on politics and politico national review online and other publication and

research has been cited by the "washington journal" and so on. david holds a master degree in public policy at the kennedy stool -- school at harvard. [applause] >> thank you john. i want to start with a story about the mashup of libertarians and conservatives in this tea party. freedom works recently hosted a big tea party rally in dallas, texas called cpac. two speakers back-to-back sort of tested the ideological boundaries of the audience with their speeches. the first speaker was brian, he is a conservative pro-life minister. in full preacher mode, he talked to the audience and warned about the danger of progressive

policies. the crowd went wild. up next was harmon, who was the producer of -- a libertarian objectivist. harmon told the audience about how the central planners was coming alives in the obama administration and the crowd went wild. now the point of this story is that a conservative pro-life baptist minister can share the stage at tea party event. as long as they stick to economics, the audience is right on. they may disagree about the social issues on gay marriage, on abortion. that's not what they're there to talk about. this idea of libertarians and conservatives together in the tea party focusing on fiscal issues and not focusing on differences is fundamental what

the tea party is all about. a lot of people on the left think the tea party is like incarnation of the religious right. emily i want to argue and we argue in our paper, that the tea party has strong libertarian roots. first that the tea party is half libertarian. second that this libertarian energy of the tea party actually help start the formation of the tea party coming out of the ron paul campaign. third that the tea party is actually changing the republican party in a more libertarian direction. first, half the tea party is libertarian but it's important to know how we define libertarian. many of you in this room, you probably read the magazine, you're the hard core. if you were offered the option for a poster to say whether you're libertarian or not, you might say yes, i'm libertarian. that means you're among 2 or 4 percent of the public. there's a broader group of

people who hold libertarian belief who never heard of the word libertarian. it's actually that broader group that openly and -- emily are talking about. these people can be called fiscally conservative or socially liberal. that's what we're talking about in this paper and who we looked at in other research at cato on libertarian vote. so, if you asked the question of tea party supporter, how many are libertarian. this chart shows three national poll that's emily i put together in 2010 that looked at the tea party from the "new york timeses" the washington post and gallop. as well as two local polls. what you see is that the tea party is split pretty evenly between people who are libertarian and people who are conservative across national polls and also locally.

now, libertarian tea partyers tend to be a little bit more independent. they tend to be less loyal to republican party and swing vote. conservative tea partyers tend to be more loyal republican voters. both groups differ on some issues immigration, gay marriage and abortion and interestingly, libertarians they don't attend church as much. about 25% of libertarian who go to church once a week, which is about what the average does among the entire population. above 50% tea party conservatives go to church once a week. both sides of the tea party, libertarians and conservatives are similarly focused on the fiscal issues on spending, on dead on the constitution and they're worried about the next generation. this is why the tea party has remained focused on the fiscal issues. like i described in that scene in dallas, texas. it's because that's where they agree. the moment you veer off on to the social issues, lose half

your membership. second argument i want to make is about the roots of this libertarian energy that's part of the tea party. now, go back to 2008, libertarians were mad as hell after eight years of the bush administration, the spending, the wars, erosion of privacy through patriot act, t.s.a. they were so mad some libertarians voted for the democrats in spite in 2004 and 2006. but nothing was more frustrating to libertarians than the bank bailout in september 2008. this was when george bush famously said we have to save the free market by abandoning it. what you will find in the data is that this moment was when libertarian anger got through the roof and other conservatives begin to join this argument about increase this spending that libertarians have been making. i want to show you how this is revealed in the data. emily i looked at a panel set by

university of michigan. it's more like a medical trial. basically they start in 2008 with a group of about 3000 respondents, they follow those voters over a period of two years and ask questions at several different ways along the way. how angry are you at the republican party, how angry are you at the george w. bush. in 2010, they asked about the tea party. we can actually work backwards in time knowing people who will join the tea party and see where they came from. let's see how libertarians compare to conservatives. this chart shows from 2008 at the beginning of 2009 and the top line maybe a little hard to see with the colors, the top line tea party libertarians, this next line is libertarians more general and these bottom two lines are conservative and republicans more generally. what you see here is that libertarians were more than

twice as angry at the republican party and only got more so, more angry as 2008 went along. this next slide shows the same pattern. this is anger towards george w. bush. notice interestingly, right at september 2008, that point with t.a.r.p., is where anger spikes up for both tea party conservatives and tea party libertarians. the final slide maybe a little busy but this actually traces tea partiers from 2008 all the way through may 2009 the start of the tea party. this is a question about how much people can effect government. sort of get that edgy frustration that people were describing. the top two data points you see in the beginning here are libertarians and notice once again around september 2008, anger spikes up. but interestingly, libertarian

anger sort of stays at a high point through that early period of the tea party and conservatives and other republicans start to join libertarians in that anger. this actually tracks with what we hear from tea partyers when we interview them. they say, look, we were part of the ron paul movement, we were so frustrated, we got involved, we did whatever we could. along the way, lot of republicans, conservatives others begin to join in the movement. interestingly, a lot of libertarians got a little frustrated that these other people were joining the people they had helped start. the reason why this is important is that this libertarian energy has actually helped the tea party right from the beginning to stay focused on the fiscal issues. so the third argument i like to make is that the tea party is changing the republican party and making it more libertarian. tea partyers are now about 6 in 10 of republican primary voters. they have a lot of sway.

first in policy and second in the direction of its candidates. on policy many of you might have seen that the republican national committee platform packed 11 out of 12 tea party freedom platform items. some included cutting spending, auditing the fed. also found it kind of interesting that politicians here in d.c. are starting to suck up to libertarian and tea partyers. to orin hatch who survived a strong tea party challenge decided to co-sponsor a bill with rand paul. another example mitch mcconnell he actually cohosted ron paul's going away party it -- for him in the house. you starting to see establishment politicians trying

to come to more libertarian tea partyers. the second way is in candidates. the conventional political wisdom and primary for last two decks deck -- decades to win in a republican primary. you have to emphasize the social issues, abortion and gay marriage. not so him. increasingly you're seeing candidates emphasize the fiscal issues and win in republican primaries and even win in general elections. i call this strategy for the functionally libertarian. the candidates aren't libertarian per se but they campaign and legislate as libertarians would. in the 2010 cycle, i put senators rand paul, pat toomey in this category. these are all tough races for the general but these candidates are pulling even in the polls. of course, these candidates will hold strong positions on social

issue and foreign policy. that's not the way they're defining their campaign. so, in conclusion, the tea party has been around for almost four years now and last week, politico in an arena chat asked whether the tea party brand is broken. they showed surprisingly tea party support and 40% of the public say they will support the tea party. interestingly you certainly wouldn't know this from the media account, cnn shows up tick for the tea party through the telephony election -- 2012 election cycle. to the extend that romney and other republican candidates win this election, it's because they're acting more like tea

partiers not less. it's the issues that the tea party is focused on about spending, debt and about the economy. these are the very same issue that majority of the americans are concerned about including independents. the tea party brand may stay or shift. but this libertarian impact will likely continue to be felt for many years to come. thank you. [applause]. >> thank you david. our next two speakers will be counted among the most well known in the america. first will be jonathan haith. he joined the new york university school of business in july2011. professor haith is a social psychologist who's research examined the intuitive foundations of morality. his most recent book is "new

york times" best seller, "the rightious mind." in that book he shows how variations in moral intuitions can help explain the american culture war between left and right. he has applied his research on psychology and rethink business ethics is studied. integrated into the curriculum before coming to stern, professor haith taught 16 years at university of virginia and given three awards for teaching. his first book was the happiness hypothesis. excellent book i read. his writing appear frequently in the "new york times" and the "washington journal." writing about him appear quite frequently in the "new york times" and the "washington journal."

professor haith received a b.a. in philosophy from yale university and ph.d. in psychology from the university of pennsylvania. professor haith, welcome to cato. >> thanks so much john. there's a pleasure and honor to be here at cato. i never been here before but i've been reading and learning about libertarians for a long time. study more foundation of politics. my jumping off point for the talk today is little in line with david and emily's paper. as typical national poll none of national polls offered response to libertarians. everyone assume you're libertarian or conservative but there's a single dimension. they ask the question, what happens if you do. what do you learn if you allow

the libertarians to distinguish themselves from liberals and conservative. you'll see the paper if you read their paper, you found there are big differences in demographics. libertarians are more educated, more male and less religious. you find differences on social policy. but my question is, what about personality? what kinds of people are they? not just what they believe. what are their personality trait. i ask this because personality and politics is the hottest area in political psychology. ever since in 1990s if you take identical twins separate ate birth and you know one is conservative, much likely chance to be a conservative. your genes make your brain, your

brain has certain traits. those traits make you just more responsive to liberal arguments perhaps or conservative arguments. your personality doesn't dictate your final politics but it nudges you in one direction or another. all people talk about is liberal and conservative. what about libertarians. well, it is good reason to think that libertarian and conservatives are going to be different sorts of people survive to challenge. these people are not conservatives, they're not republicans, they're libertarians and i'm dog on offended by it. i despise these people. this is air difference sorts of -- this is different sorts of people. i happen to run or co-run with my colleague a website called

yourmore.org. where people can come. when people come before they get to this page, they register, you give us a little bit demographic organization. unlike most survey, we don't force what you are. the data i show you today, will be the grouping people who chose very liberal or slightly liberal, slightly conservative, for people that don't want to pick one of those, we let them say, don't know or other. we don't want to put people into a box. then we'll see how personalities differ. the sample that i'll tell you about, says not representative

sample, the numbers i show you can't be taken for that number for this group in america. for this sample, this is 130,000 people most whom are liberal. those who comes to our website. we have a lot of libertarians in our data at 10 or 12 percent. 20,000 conservatives are libertarians and overwhelmingly male. about two-thirds of libertarians are males and four-fifths. here's the data, we had about 40 or 50 studies where we could compare liberals, conservatives and libertarians. to publish it, we had to pick about 15 of them. to publish that, we broke it up into three sets of studies all around a common theme.

i know ayn rand doesn't speak for all libertarians. it is the morality of -- libertarians will register almost all the moral values or at least except for liberty. our main instrument is called the moral foundation of questionnaire. we have variety of questions about five moral foundation, care, fairness, loyalty. libertarians in the black bar, score actually low on everything. like conservatives, they are low on care and compassion. libertarians they're basically

liberals who lack bleeding hearts. there's some truth to that. at least here they are low on care and compassion, along with conservatives. you see the black and red bars. they are low on fairness. here fairness more about equality. later on we change fairness. in this way, libertarians are like conservatives. however, when we look at these more social conservative foundations, now libertarians are indistinguishable from liberals. they don't care a lot about patriotism, protecting the flag. all of those are social issues that david says. there's a difference you see that here. bottom line, libertarians can side with either side. they can look out at other issues. they don't fit properly with other side of the one

dimensional spectrum. after we did this research, we thought -- apart from reading david's work and other writings and writings from cato on libertarian and what libertarians stand for, we realize, liberty is a basic value we didn't include in our original set. we made up some items to evaluation of liberty, we cut the data on that and we did a factor analysis to figure out what are the different subtypes of liberty. we found lifestyle liberty -- we found when we ran these items on thousands and thousands of people, that libertarians are indeed high on both these kinds of liberty. they value life liberty more than do liberals. liberals and libertarians side together on gay rights, fighting the drug war and things like that. conservatives are thed on man

out -- odd man out. when it comes to economic liberty, liberals are very low. they don't think there are these major rights to economic liberty. whereas libertarians and conservatives do. that of course is the area of overlap that david was talking about. these are sort of moral attitudes. you can call them personality if you want. let's get more deeply into personality. ayn rand, every aspect of western culture needs code of ethics is a rational ethics. libertarians seem proud of the fact that they are rational, less said by emotion. we find that is indeed the case. the most revealing one i think in our whole paper is a personality that comes the empathizing scale. whole bunch of items that will give you a score on systemizing.

which is a drive understanding variables in the system. if you like to understand subway maps, spreadsheets any sort of chess, any sort of complex system, if you enjoy doing that, that's your high on systemizing. empathize is the drive to identify the emotion that other person is experiencing and response with appropriate emotion. men is high on systemizing and women are high on empathizing. what we find is that libertarians the most masculine out there. even if we analyze only the men, just look at men, libertarian men are the highest on systemizing of any of the three groups and they're the lowest on empathizing. libertarians are the only group who is systemizing scores in absolute terms -- are actually higher than their empathizing

scores. this affects to lot of things happening. this might be part of the growing separation between the libertarians in the last several decades. whole bunch of other studies in the paper but to summarizing i can tell you like this, if there's a measure of emotion, libertarians is the lowest in three groups. if there's a measure of reasoning and rationality, they're the highest. need for cognition, we get logic problems if you go with your gut feeling you get it wrong. libertarians score highest, conservatives lowest. tolerance and ambiguity and all of those traits, libertarians are the highest. on emotions almost every emotion measure we used, compassion and gratitude, libertarians are the lowest. this is within gender. just looking a the libertarian men and women compared to other

men and women. one exception, only one emotion that we have married which is call -- measured which is called reactive. it makes the angry when other people is held up for model for me to follow. this is my favorite. when something is prohibited, i usually think that's exactly what i will do. libertarians do have a emotional reaction when people infringe on their liberty or somehow manipulate them to go a certain way. they rear up and say no, don't tell me to do that. very different from social conservatives. third, how do libertarians relate to others. if libertarians are more cerebral and less emotional, you might think this will impact the relationship. indeed it does.

ayn rand was first to say i love you. i live for you, i long for pup we -- long for hypothesize. the major measure of personality that is widely used is called the big five. it measures these five traits. openness to specious, do you like new ideas, you probably high on openness to experience. libertarians and liberals are really high. this is why they encounter each other so often at cultural events. they like to go to same sorts things. now let's look at the three trait that's are really associated with sociability. on the left you see the data for extroversion. how much teacher like being with people. liberals and conservatives like to interact with each other.

the second set of bars is, how nice, warm and friendly and how easy it is to get along with you. liberals and conservatives are equal, libertarians are low. third set of bars, conscientious. conservatives are the highest and libertarians are low. on major personalities, libertarians are curious, open minded people but they're not that focused on other people. they want to learn but they're not that focused on getting along with others. one last scale i'll show you, this one was little surprising. these are questions about how much do you have warm tender feelings for your partners on the left, family and friend or people in general? what we find is that conservatives score the highest of the three groups on family. that's not surprising.

liberals scored highest on generic other. liberals claim to feel less compassion and general others. actually they claim to feel more love or general others than their own families. libertarians are low on every single one. libertarians claim to love their parents less than do liberals and conservatives. libertarians rely upon reason more and emotion less than eithers liberals or conservatives. they are more individualistic than less connected to other people. libertarians and conservatives are very odd couple indeed. in our data actually, libertarians are little bit more similar to liberals than they were to conservatives. but, they are uniting

politically with conservatives nowadays and the tea party because they have a common enemy. they are united by a devotion to economic liberty and in particular an opposition to the welfare state for very different reasons, i believe. libertarians hate the welfare state because it is constantly infringing on one person liberty to help another group. libertarians hate the welfare state. i think even the reason for hating the welfare state is different but the proverb says, the enemy by enemy my friend. that's it. thank you. [applause] >> it's hard to not sit here and hear that all of you people out there and this people in this building, that's all about you.

second renown public intellectual today is joshua. he's a guest of scholar at brookings institution. he's written several books including gay marriage, why it's good for gays, good for straights and good for america. many of you had the experience i had with this particular book. people's minds don't often change. i remarked this particular book had surprising effect on people that i've come across. he's also written other books, including book on governments ends, which is a revised book

about an earlier version. for many of you, you know him from his 12 year position as a column social study of the national journal. he's writing now regularly in the atlantic among other places and he's written for every major publication you can think of. john was born and raised in phoenix, arizona and graduated in 1982 from yale university. please welcome john. >> thank you very much john. i come to these things for the introductions. thank you all. thanks especially to david for that marvelous presentation. my job is to amplify a little bit from a slightly different point of view. i had the privilege of being

both the journalist and scholar at the brookings institution where the tea party emerged one of the things that was heavily debate in the hallway. what is this phenomenon. the other aspects of that debate, are they hard right conservatives. are they basically sarah palin and so forth or are they something knew, genuine grassroots libertarian movements. which is something we've seen much in america. david kirby performed a great service by shattering the myth of the monolithic tea party. if i had to summarize our two prior presentations in a headline, a simplistic headline, it would be david saying that the tea partyers are not monolithic and jonathan saying

tea partyers are not loveable. what david finds i think makes his paper a landmark and a break through and well worth downloading and reading, he finally puts the pieces together so you can see it a lot of it in one place. it's like the three blind men says it's a tree trunk and one said it's a snake and so forth. well, it's both. david nails this by finding that the tea party movement is about 50% social conservatives and 50% libertarians. with the energy in this movement waxing and waning from the libertarian side but a lot of it coming originally from the libertarian side. his findings scared with my own. in 2010, i decided to go out and because i had the privilege of being a journalist, i could actually investigate this and looking at a lot of data. i'm going to amplify what david by showing you what i found which is awfully relevant.

instead of talking primarily about ideology, i like to talk about brand and style. i think that is where the distinctive features of where the tea party lie. there is a sense in which the tea party is distinctive from everything else. distinctive from ordinary libertarian and distinctive from ordinary conservatives. which makes it stand out in politics. to show you what that is, i like to begin with a few couple slides showing where i believe the tea party movement originates. this is pew data. it shows the american electorate by position. there is no libertarian category. here there doesn't need to be. these categories are pretty stable over the years in 2007 and 2008 if you're looking carefully something interesting starts to happen which continues

into 2010 and becomes quite pronounced. which is a drift of conservatives out of the republican camp and into the independent camp. this is a phenomenon is debranding. these are people who are conservatives who are rejecting the conservative label and for some reason or another, they are thinking of themselves increasingly as independents. another way to look at this brand decline, which perhaps comes out even more clearly, if you simply look at party affiliation for americans a whole, again, you see stability over the ten year period. but republicans in a gradual period of decline in george w. bush's second term, and republican leaners really gaining market share, very rapidly by the standards of american politics what you see happening there in 2008, 2009 and 2010. which is a very large increase. republican leaners are

independent who don't say their republicans but lean republican in terms of their voting behaviors, political preference and so on. for some reason, you see this big batch of people who are conservatives by who no longer say they're republican. they're embracing the independenter label. well maybe you say so what, this is just labeling. it's not important. what do these people like. here are a few questions. i'll give you just a couple. here's what's interesting about this group and it won't surprise you if you've before listening to david kirby. they move both republicans and republican leaners, this is the group -- i call them debranded republicans -- shift very sharply to the right between 1997 and 2010. government has gone too far in regulating business. the bright red is republicans

and light are independents. you see the huge right ward shift. democrats and democratic shift a little bit to the liberal side. independents shift a little bit to the conservative side but clearly the giant movement in the electoral over this period is a very sharp right ward movement among republicans and republican leaners. know what's going on here, in terms of the rate of change, independent leaners are swinging harder than republicans are swinging. they're turning right faster and in many cases, for instance government a threat to our freedom, they're lining up to the right of republicans. note these are not coincidentally libertarian questions. government programs should be cut back. independent leaners, republican leaners come out to the right. government deserves poor

ratings, speaks for itself. if you show you comparable slides on social issues, the pattern looks very different. you don't see these republican leaners to the right of republicans. what's emerging here is a group of political people who are very conservative on economic issues if anything to the right of the republicans who have shifted very far to the right and who do not brand themselves as republicans. i would assert that if you are a good political analyst and you were locked in a room and you couldn't read any of the headlines for the last two years, all you could look at polling data like this, you would see this and say, there must be something out there happening like the tea party. or if not something very much like it. that is clearly what is going on in the political base. so, are they just more of the same? republicans in drag, which you can conclude libertarian republicans in drag who register the republican label but

otherwise are the same thing. some of my liberal friends made that case and still make it. they're just basically republicans who retend not to be necessarily. i disagree with them. you have to look at style as well as substance. and this gets actually to jonathan work on personality. often how you believe is just as important on what you believe. let me give you three important dimensions on which i think tea partyers are collectively different. first, compromise. this is a good basic question by pew on attitudes towards compromise. you admire leaders who stick to their position or who may compromise. the actual question is a little more complicated than that. but that's basically it. 2010 data hasn't changed very much although i haven't been able to find a replication of this question, unfortunately.

democrats favor compromise by a quite substantial margin. independents are more on the fence. i don't see them here but tend to favor compromise. republicans very different. they do not like compromise but now look at tea party. this is remarkable. that's as strong as you can get in america to something that looks like a confirm consensus. they do not like compromise and they reject politicians who do compromise and they are quite distinct even from republicans in the extent to which that is true. indeed, we know that will punish politicians who compromise which brings us to dimension number two. they will punish republicans who compromise. again, pew data. these are all data on attitudes toward republican leaders toward incumbents, how much you want new faces in government. they all test people's

willingness to vote for politicians out of loyalty whether to the party or whether because that politician has been there for a while and to vote on wanting the incumbent ousted. this data is striking to me. in terms of disapproval of republican leaders, republican leaners, the energy driver, motor behind the tea party, look more like democrats than they do like republicans. now that's remarkable. they are simply not loyal republicans. do they want their incumbent ousted, you bet. less party loyalty among this group by far than any other category. they do not like incumbents. do they want new faces in government? same story. this gives these people very different flavor from partisan republicans. the definition of a partisan is

this is someone who will vote for you even when they think you're wrong. that's your base. these guys are saying, we are not part of the republican base. at least that's what they were saying in 2010. that makes for a very different political dynamic since they're not loyal republicans, since know don't like compromise. if you're a republican incumbent, you're very scare of these people. you cannot make a deal on taxes or the debt limit without worrying these guys will punish you and they will. they've made a complicative strategic decision to prioritize spending over everything else. they may disagree on many other things but they don't disagree on spending. i would argue this is a strategic decision. when i talked to tea party leaders, they said this is a strategy.

they said, conservative leaders, republican leaders especially have used social issues like abortions and gay marriage as a distraction. to divide us and to distract us while they made government bigger . guess what ' not falling for that anymore. in my opinion, largely right. and in fact, they're not falling for it anymore. in jonathan's terms what we have here is not a movement made up of people who agree one another or who only have one flavor ideologically who have come together nonetheless one flavor movement. this gives them a whole lot of potency in the political process. they will continue, in my opinion, to have quite a good

deal of potency as long as they can sustain their focus, narrowness and independence. it is hard to stay that focused when your membership is divided as tea partyers fundamentally are. there are lots and lots being murdered in america. it's hard to maintain the kind of discipline that they showed and the republicans are working as hard as they possibly can to bring in these folks and turn them into loyal members of the republican base. very hard to stay outside of the republican machine forever because the republicans have a lot of money, a lot of political power, a lot of institutional clout and things like primaries and voting rules. in a lot of ways, they can make tea partyers life difficult and in a lot of ways, they can make it quite attractive. if i had to predict, i'd say the tea party would be a two or five year movement. it will lose its edge.

i also say that, i don't remember having seen anything quite like this before. occupy wall street, move on.org. they have some similarity. i never seen anything quite this combination of independence and ideological discipline. i'm really not willing to have prediction on how long the tea partyers will be around. i will say they are not a conventional improve or movement. [applause]. .

>> we've made lots of different points today, and i found two issues have been overlooked by academics, pendants, and politicians alike, and i think this is a great time to kind of set the record straight. from what i found in my research at the tea party

movement as part of my dissertation research, i got in my car, drove around the country, and interviewed local level to party leaders in local diners and restaurants. we sat down. i went to virginia, pennsylvania, kentucky, utah, california, and it was surprising how similar the world views of these t partiers were, and yet, so distinct from my academic colleagues at ucla where i had been getting my ph.d. -- the world views of these tea partiers. one thing that sets the tea party apart from many others is they have a very traditional view of the american dream. a 12 million -- toquevillian view, if you look. they have this view that all people of all backgrounds can succeed. this is not to say that other americans do not have this view,

but they have this believe even more so, and it permeates how they answer poll questions and also helps explain a lot of their other policy positions that other people have a hard time understanding. let's go through this -- these are some pictures i took at a washington, d.c., tea party protest. you often see signs like this. "do not spread my wealth -- spread my work ethic." "stop punishing success and rewarding failure." this is part of a common theme throughout the tea party. throughout the tea party. for this